Starkey: Big Ben one of a kind
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/steelers/s_639658.html#
By Joe Starkey
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Sunday, August 23, 2009

Philip Rivers?

I'm still reeling from my recent radio interview with Aaron Schatz of profootballoutsiders.com. The topic was NFL quarterbacks. Schatz said the top four are Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees and Rivers, and that Ben Roethlisberger doesn't belong in the conversation.

Wow.

If someone as knowledgeable and respected as Schatz — his Football Outsiders Almanac is a must-read — doesn't include Roethlisberger in that conversation, you have to wonder how many others fail to comprehend Roethlisberger's greatness.

How is this possible, five years into such a decorated career?

I like Philip Rivers. He's very good. He had 34 touchdowns and only 11 interceptions last season. But if you polled all 32 NFL general managers and more than one said he would choose Rivers over Roethlisberger, I'd be stunned (and I'd want Chargers GM A.J. Smith injected with truth serum).

If you polled the 32 defensive coordinators and asked who would cause them more sleepless hours — Rivers or Roethlisberger — I'd be doubly stunned if two said Rivers.

Roethlisberger isn't merely great. He has "changed the position," as teammate Charlie Batch puts it. We're talking about a 6-foot-5, 241-pound mammoth with a cannon arm, an uncanny ability to extend plays with his feet and a flair for the biggest moments.

There has never been anyone quite like him.

I'm not saying Roethlisberger already is an all-time great. It's too early for that. I am saying that his first five years were historically successful and that he is a unique player for his position.

A look at the 23 quarterbacks in the Pro Football Hall of Fame reveals that none is as tall or as heavy as Roethlisberger. The closest in height are Troy Aikman and Dan Marino at 6-4. The closest in weight is Marino at 228 pounds — and neither of those guys could move like Roethlisberger.

Just for kicks, I looked at the 19 linebackers in the Hall of Fame and found that only three outweighed Roethlisberger and only one (6-7 Ted Hendricks) was taller.

Now everybody wants one — and the likes of Rivers, Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco appear to be built of similar material. Time will tell.

Those who undervalue Roethlisberger invariably point to his alleged lack of gaudy statistics. Here's the thing: He has gaudy statistics, even after an injury-plagued season in which he threw for 17 TDs and 15 interceptions.

It depends on which stats you emphasize, and as Steelers receiver Hines Ward says: "This ain't fantasy football."

Roethlisberger owns the seventh-best passer rating in NFL history (89.43), the most wins (51) through five seasons since 1950 and the second-best winning percentage (.728), including playoffs, among active quarterbacks. Brady is first at .789.

Roethlisberger's postseason record is 8-2, third in NFL history (10 or more games) behind Brady (14-3) and Bart Starr (9-1).

Manning is 7-8, Rivers 3-3.

Roethlisberger has engineered 17 fourth-quarter wins, including Super Bowl XLIII and the 92-yard TD drive in Baltimore last season. How many other quarterbacks, behind that offensive line, beat that defense in that situation?

And yes, he has two Super Bowl rings.

Finally, a stat for the geeks: yards-per-attempt. An excellent Web site called coldhardfootballfacts.com says yards-per-attempt is "the single most important indicator of success in football. ... Guys with a high yards-per-attempt win games."

Guys with a high YPA also aren't dinking the ball downfield, so for anyone who thinks Roethlisberger's flashy passer rating is built on safe throws within a rigid system, think again.

The three modern-era leaders in YPA, according to the site (minimum: 1,500 attempts):

1. Kurt Warner - 8.04

2. Steve Young - 7.98

3. Roethlisberger - 7.86

The six all-time leaders (who have accounted for 17 pro titles):

1. Otto Graham - 8.63

2. Sid Luckman - 8.42

3. Norm Van Brocklin - 8.16

4. Warner - 8.04

5. Young - 7.98

6. Roethlisberger - 7.86

Roethlisberger's vital stats took a hit in 2008 because he was injured and couldn't throw an effective deep ball for several weeks. Offensive coordinator Bruce Arians said Roethlisberger was hurt worse than most knew.

"The Jacksonville game, we were in the ballroom at the hotel, at about 2 p.m., throwing to see if he could play," Arians said. "He was throwing at (multiple angles, including side-arm) to see how he could release the ball. I didn't think there was any chance. Well, he threw for 300 yards and took us down in the last seconds to win.

"He never ceases to amaze me."

The issue really boils down to this: If I had to put what's left of my 401(k) on one active quarterback coming through in the final minutes of a big game, I'd have to think long and hard between Brady and Roethlisberger.

Philip Rivers wouldn't cross my mind.

Joe Starkey can be reached at jstarkey@tribweb.com or 412-320-7810.

FSUBoo

08-23-2009, 01:30 AM

Nice read, and finally a sportswriter that gets it. I'm so sick of the man love that people have for Brady. I WOULD take Big Ben OVER ANY OTHER QB IN THE LEAGUE!!!!! (Lol just wanted to emphasize that). He might not have the fantasy numbers, but he has the one stat that matters. Wins and SB titles. You can have your Tom, Tony, or Brett that will get you all the fantasy numbers in the world, but I'll take my Big Ben when the tough times come and we need a drive to win a SB and not a Fantasy Football playoff game.

Mandy90

08-23-2009, 02:51 AM

I don't agree with this read. Rivers is a more complete QB at the moment and works better within his system. For whatever reason, Ben always seems to slow with his reads and anticipation. People always praise him for extending the play and that because of a poor o-line, but that is more a function of him just not being an effective pocket passer and not being able to know where to go with the ball.

Don't get me wrong Ben is still a more effective passer than 90% of QBs in the NFL. However, until he learns how to become a better pocket passer and get the ball out quicker, he won't be in Rivers class.

fansince'76

08-23-2009, 04:30 AM

I don't agree with this read. Rivers is a more complete QB at the moment and works better within his system. For whatever reason, Ben always seems to slow with his reads and anticipation. People always praise him for extending the play and that because of a poor o-line, but that is more a function of him just not being an effective pocket passer and not being able to know where to go with the ball.

Don't get me wrong Ben is still a more effective passer than 90% of QBs in the NFL. However, until he learns how to become a better pocket passer and get the ball out quicker, he won't be in Rivers class.

Let me know when Rivers actually wins something. And please spare me the "Ben has a great defense to work with" argument, because Rivers has been a member of top to bottom one of the most talented rosters (if not THE most talented) in the league for the last several years now. Thanks.

sharkweek

08-23-2009, 04:46 AM

Let them say what they want, the truth of the matter is that Ben is perfect for for the Steelers. They win games and Superbowls because of what he brings to the team, that's all that I care about. He still has plenty of years to start putting up gaudy numbers, although I'd rather he keep winning Superbowls if I was forced to choose one or the other.

I don't agree with this read. Rivers is a more complete QB at the moment and works better within his system.
Considering the goal of any NFL team system is to win, I am going to have disagree with your read.

The whole pocket passer mantra is old and ignorant, Ben scrambles out of the pocket to make plays, and when he does he often makes the opposing defenses look absolutely silly. If anyone needs an example of what happens to a god-like pocket passer when he is overwhelmed by a superior pass rush, Superbowl XLII should have been more than enough.

steel striker

08-23-2009, 07:48 AM

It simply amazes me how some people still dis Ben after all he has done with steelers. There is not another qb who could have his success with our o-line. Ben makes big plays when it matters most. As far as the so called experts go they just can't except the fact that Ben is one of the best qb's in the game PERIOD!

Mandy90

08-23-2009, 07:59 AM

The whole pocket passer mantra is old and ignorant, Ben scrambles out of the pocket to make plays, and when he does he often makes the opposing defenses look absolutely silly. If anyone needs an example of what happens to a god-like pocket passer when he is overwhelmed by a superior pass rush, Superbowl XLII should have been more than enough.

Any QB against a rush like that is going to be rendered ineffective, it doesn't matter who it is or what they do. Does the Eagles game from last year come to mind? Ben's headless chicken routine didn't work because they were on him in less than two seconds (much like Brady in the Superbowl) before he could even think of running outside the pocket to 'make them look silly'. So Brady's lack of play-making ability outside of the pocket had nothing to do with his ineffectiveness in that game, because you could have put Ben or Michael Vick in there and they still would have been pummeled just as bad because the rush was that heavy.

mesaSteeler

08-23-2009, 08:28 AM

I don't agree with this read. Rivers is a more complete QB at the moment and works better within his system. For whatever reason, Ben always seems to slow with his reads and anticipation. People always praise him for extending the play and that because of a poor o-line, but that is more a function of him just not being an effective pocket passer and not being able to know where to go with the ball.

Don't get me wrong Ben is still a more effective passer than 90% of QBs in the NFL. However, until he learns how to become a better pocket passer and get the ball out quicker, he won't be in Rivers class.

(The article is from last year but it provides an effective rebuttal to your point of view. The QB that does not belong in the conversation is Rivers not Big Ben. - mesa)

It's official: Big Ben one of the best
Cold, Hard Football Facts for September 30, 2008
http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_2440_It%27s_official:_Big_Ben_one_of_the_best.h tml

Big Ben is one of the all-time leaders in two of the most important stats in football.

Roethlisberger has been a Cold, Hard Football Facts favorite since he exploded onto the scene as a rookie in 2004, leading Pittsburgh to a 15-1 record and a spot in the AFC title game, and then winning a Super Bowl with the Steelers in his sophomore season.

After all, you don’t win consistently in the NFL without strong play at quarterback. So when the Steelers were suddenly winning in historic fashion (the 2004 Steelers are one of the few teams in history to win 15 games), the natural place to turn for answers was the passing game.

And it turned out that Roethlisberger’s historic string of victories in his first two years was accompanied by historic passing efficiency numbers – especially for such a young player.

Now in his fifth year, Roethlisberger officially enters the record books and finds himself among some of the very best passers in the history of the game. If he can repeat his first four-plus years in the league over the next four-plus season, he’s a bona fide first ballot Hall of Famer.

Big Ben No. 5 all-time in passer rating
As of today, Roethlisberger boasts a career passer rating of 92.52.

It’s a number that puts him – officially – at No. 5 on the list, one spot behind No. 4 Tom Brady (92.91) and one spot ahead of No. 6 Joe Montana (92.26). In our book (yes, our book has lots of pretty pictures) that’s damn good company.

It’s no coincidence, by the way, that every player in the Top 5 has won at least one Super Bowl. Passer rating has a lot of critics, because it’s so unwieldy. But it’s also a pretty good measure of success and typically has a high correlation to winning football games.

It’s no coincidence, for example, that the Steelers had gone a quarter-century without a Super Bowl victory before Big Ben arrived on the scene. Efficient passers win football games.

Big Ben No. 5 all-time in passing yards per attempt
Roethlisberger’s top-five spot in YPA is probably more impressive than his top-five spot on the all-time passer rating list.

After all, YPA seems to have a higher correlation to winning than does the more complex passer rating formula. The difference is not too great. In fact, the two often move in lock-step (just look at the example of Big Ben, No. 5 all time in both categories). But YPA often seems to be a more telling stat and it tends to cut across different eras more often than passer rating (which clearly favors contemporary passers).

Yards per attempt is also an attractive indicator because it's so cut and dry that even the casual fan can comprehend what it means. Plus, there is probably no individual stat in all of sports with such a high correlation to winning (if you know of one, please share it with us).

All were champions. In fact, the top three were multiple champions, and No. 1 on the list is the greatest champion.

The Old School factor
There’s another reason Big Ben stands out in the eyes of the Cold, Hard Football Facts – another reason why, in our rare dalliances with emotions and feelings – we like Big Ben.

At the risk of tossing out a cliché (one we’ll quickly polish into a shiny Cold, Hard Football Fact with supporting data), Roethlisberger is an Old School quarterback – a rare modern manifestation of the type of passer you might have seen in an earlier, mud-and-spittle era of pro football.

Back in the 1950s and 1960s, quarterbacks generally handed the ball off more often than they passed it – just like Big Ben does today. But when they did pass, it was typically a high-risk, high-reward downfield throw – much like those passes that Big Ben throws today.

(Of course, the true romantic might envision Big Ben back in the 1940s, slinging the ball down field on offense and then muscling up on defense a la Sammy Baugh. Big Ben certainly seems built like a linebacker, while Baugh, one of the best passers in history, was also a great defensive back.)

To put Big Ben in our comfort zone – that is, to discuss him through the pigskin prism of raw data – Roethlisberger is a throwback performer statistically.

In recent years, offenses have focused on short, high-percentage, low-risk passes more than they did in the past. Think the Joe Montana-Tom Brady school of passing theory, which was made possible by the rule changes of 1978 that spawned the Live Ball Era. (Brady and Montana might be as close statistically as any two passers in history.)

Montana entered the NFL in 1979, just in time to take advantage of the new rules, and under the right coach to take take advantage of the new rules, Paul Brown disciple Bill Walsh

Before Montana, teams tended to throw down the field more aggressively. Montana parlayed new-school offense into four Super Bowl victories and a reputation as the best ever at his position. Brady, before his injury this year, had taken the conservative strategy even further, turning a low YPA average (especially before 2007) and an extaordinarily low INT rate into an historically high passer rating and three Super Bowl victories.

So in recent years, per-attempt averages have generally declined in the NFL, while passer ratings (which reward high completion percentages and low INT rates) have skyrocketed.

Just three active players, for example, are in the top 15 all time in YPA (Warner, Roethlisberger and Peyton Manning). But every player in the Top 20 all time in passer rating began their careers in the Live Ball Era (1978-present). Fifteen of those in the Top 20 are still active.

Roethlisberger is the rare player high on both lists. The old-school style of the Pittsburgh offense has helped him put up a YPA average similar to those seen in the 1950s. But the fact that defenders can no longer prison-shank receivers, offensive linemen and even quarterbacks, has allowed Roethlisberger to translate that high YPA into the high passer rating more typical of contemporary football, too.

mesaSteeler

08-23-2009, 08:29 AM

**contintution of the article*** - mesa
The risk of being Ben
Roethlisberger is not a perfect quarterback. Of course, nobody is.

In Big Ben’s case, he takes too many sacks and throws an inordinate number of picks relative to the number of times he drops back to pass.

Roethlisberger has attempted 1,519 passes in his career. But he’s actually dropped back to pass 1,680 times – if you include the 161 sacks he’s suffered (an average of about 40 per year and nearly three per game). He’s also thrown 55 INTs.

So that’s a total of 216 negative pass plays (sacks + INTs) in just 1,680 dropbacks – or a negative pass play on 12.86 percent of every drop back. That’s a high number of negative pass plays by modern standards. To put it into perspective, compare Roethlisberger to the two players widely regarded as the best contemporary quarterbacks:

* Big Ben suffers a negative pass play on 12.86 percent of dropbacks (216 in 1,680 dropbacks)
* Brady suffers a negative pass play on 7.49 percent of dropbacks (289 in 3,856 dropbacks)
* Manning suffers a negative pass play on 6.39 percent of dropbacks (353 in 5,721 dropbacks)

The high number of negative pass plays certainly reinforces Roethlisberger's Old School cred. After all, negative pass plays were far more common before the Live Ball Era, when defenses were given greater leeway to play aggressively. Old School-cred or not, they're called negative pass plays for a reason: you don't want 'em.

But the greater concern for Steelers fans should be the declining numbers.

Big Ben’s average per attempt has consistently declined, from 8.88 in his rookie year of 2004 and 8.89 in his Super Bowl-winning year of 2005, to 7.81 last year and a career low 7.69 so far this year.

He’s on pace for just 16 TD passes this year, which would be a career low. And his 93.3 passer rating so far in 2008 would be the lowest except for his 2006 season that was marred by so many on- and off-the-field issues and injuries. Pittsburgh's once-proud offensive line has struggled this year, too: Roethlisberger has been sacked 15 times in four games, which puts him on pace to be taken down a career-high 60 times.

They’re trends that can be overcome. As Big Ben matures (he’s still only 26), maybe he’ll learn to become the more conservative, high-percentage, low-risk, quick-release passer that defines the modern game. Maybe the Steelers will find a few more weapons to put around him – much like the Patriots did in 2007 for Brady, with historic results.

But for now, Steelers fans will have to settle for a quarterback who stands today among the most productive ever.

And that’s official.

Mandy90

08-23-2009, 08:47 AM

If you are going to make an argument based on statistics then i'll say that Rivers has a higher career QB rating, a better TD to INT ratio, the same completion percentage, gets sacked wayyy less, and a career AVG of 7.5 - .4 lower than Ben.

HometownGal

08-23-2009, 08:58 AM

Let me know when Rivers actually wins something. And please spare me the "Ben has a great defense to work with" argument, because Rivers has been a member of top to bottom one of the most talented rosters (if not THE most talented) in the league for the last several years now. Thanks.

:applaudit::applaudit::applaudit::applaudit:

If you are going to make an argument based on statistics then i'll say that Rivers has a higher career QB rating, a better TD to INT ratio, the same completion percentage, gets sacked wayyy less, and a career AVG of 7.5 - .4 lower than Ben.

Stats schmats. The bottom line is - how many championship wins and SB rings does Rivers sport, even with the very talented offense and stellar OL the Bolts have had? :doh:

Mandy90

08-23-2009, 09:08 AM

:applaudit::applaudit::applaudit::applaudit:

Stats schmats. The bottom line is - how many championship wins and SB rings does Rivers sport, even with the very talented offense and stellar OL the Bolts have had? :doh:

I don't like arguing with stats either I only brought it up as a rebuttal to the huge article about Ben being a statistically dominant QB.

As far as Ben winning rings. Well, in the first Superbowl he played worse than Ryan Leaf and almost lost us the game and in the last season he could barely muster any offense up all season until the final drive in the Superbowl.

stillers4me

08-23-2009, 09:14 AM

I don't like arguing with stats either I only brought it up as a rebuttal to the huge article about Ben being a statistically dominant QB.

As far as Ben winning rings. Well, in the first Superbowl he played worse than Ryan Leaf and almost lost us the game and in the last season he could barely muster any offense up all season until the final drive in the Superbowl.

We got another one, folks. :popcorn:

Mandy90

08-23-2009, 09:20 AM

We got another one, folks. :popcorn:

I know you must think you're pretty hot stuff with your high post count and all but if you don't have anything constructive to add its probably not worth posting it. :drink:

stillers4me

08-23-2009, 09:21 AM

I know you must think you're pretty hot stuff with your high post count and all but if you don't have anything constructive to add its probably not worth posting it. :drink:

Ok, pumpkin, you da boss. :drink:

Texasteel

08-23-2009, 09:28 AM

I don't like arguing with stats either I only brought it up as a rebuttal to the huge article about Ben being a statistically dominant QB.

As far as Ben winning rings. Well, in the first Superbowl he played worse than Ryan Leaf and almost lost us the game and in the last season he could barely muster any offense up all season until the final drive in the Superbowl.

I don't think you win a Superbowl inspite of your QB. In the first one I though he made the plays he had to, and was a big reason we got there in the 1st place. In the 2nd I thought he was the MVP.

stillers4me

08-23-2009, 09:30 AM

I don't think you win a Superbowl inspite of your QB. In the first one I though he made the plays he had to, and was a big reason we got there in the 1st place. In the 2nd I thought he was the MVP.

I'm suuure we would have been playing in XL if Tommy would have been our QB. :wink02:

Rotorhead

08-23-2009, 10:07 AM

I am sorry, but do you really think Rivers works better within HIS system than Ben works withing his? I guess I dont understand this considering the simple fact the Steelers have a better winning percentage with Ben than the Charger have with Rivers. Not to mention Ben has 2 rings with a far less talented roster. You cant even argue the Steelers had a better running game as the Chargers have one of the best RB's EVER on their roster. Their Defense may not be as good, but they are plenty good enough to win a championship. And my final thought is if Rivers is supposedly better than Ben, then I would argue he doesn't have the desire drive within himself to lay it on the line for a championship. Ability and a strong arms are great for a QB, but if they dont have that drive and want to win, when it comes down to that 2 minute drive, they will fail, just look at McNabb in his last SB, he would have driven down the field and possible won, but he choked (literally vomiting on the field) and lost. Ben has it, Brady, Peyton have it, Rivers doesn't. I feel if they kept Brees, they would have won a SB.

HometownGal

08-23-2009, 10:28 AM

I'm suuure we would have been playing in XL if Tommy would have been our QB. :wink02:

Whelp - we got very close to playing in the AFCC in 2002 with Tommy as our QB. Had it not been for Nedney's Academy Award winning performance, we would have been there and who knows? :noidea:

As far as Ben winning rings. Well, in the first Superbowl he played worse than Ryan Leaf and almost lost us the game and in the last season he could barely muster any offense up all season until the final drive in the Superbowl.

Did you watch the same Superbowls I watched? :jawdrop: In XL, Ben didn't have the best day throwing the football, but he made plays with his legs (as Ben does so well), including a 1 yard TD run. In XLIII, Ben completed 21 of 30 passes for 256 yards and made a pinpoint accurate pass to Santo in multiple coverage for their final TD which won the championship!!! While I agree that last season up until the playoffs, Ben didn't have an outstanding season statistically (there's that word again) - he made quite a few outstanding plays despite having one of the worst OL's in the NFL in front of him.

fansince'76

08-23-2009, 10:31 AM

If you are going to make an argument based on statistics then i'll say that Rivers has a higher career QB rating, a better TD to INT ratio, the same completion percentage, gets sacked wayyy less, and a career AVG of 7.5 - .4 lower than Ben.

....and 2 fewer rings with an arguably more talented supporting cast around him, particularly on offense.

Rotorhead

08-23-2009, 10:45 AM

Another thought . . . imagine what Peyton would have done at the helm of that team! If Rivers were on any other team, he would have subpar stats, I contend his stats are a result of his surrounding talent rather than his talent!

Gnutella

08-23-2009, 10:47 AM

If you are going to make an argument based on statistics then i'll say that Rivers has a higher career QB rating, a better TD to INT ratio, the same completion percentage, gets sacked wayyy less, and a career AVG of 7.5 - .4 lower than Ben.

Career post-season passer rating

Philip Rivers: 79.9
Ben Roethlisberger: 87.2

Give me the QB who plays better in big games.

For the record, the combined post-season passer ratings of Neil O'Donnell, Mike Tomczak, Kordell Stewart and Tommy Maddox is 69.6. (O'Donnell's in particular is 72.7.) I guess any ol' QB can win with a good defense and a good running game. :uhh:

sharkweek

08-23-2009, 01:22 PM

More fuel to the fire - Ben has posted three perfect passer rating performances in his still very young career, a feat equaled only by Peyton Manning.

#1 Big Ben Fan

08-23-2009, 03:54 PM

Career post-season passer rating

Philip Rivers: 79.9
Ben Roethlisberger: 87.2

Give me the QB who plays better in big games.

For the record, the combined post-season passer ratings of Neil O'Donnell, Mike Tomczak, Kordell Stewart and Tommy Maddox is 69.6. (O'Donnell's in particular is 72.7.) I guess any ol' QB can win with a good defense and a good running game. :uhh:

Thanks for posting the career post-season rating for both QB's. Ben still has an 87.2 and that is even with his 22 rating in Super Bowl XL.:sofunny: Ben was due for a bad game throwing the ball and just happened to be the Super Bowl when it happened. It seems some people forget that Ben played great in the three play-off games leading up to the Super Bowl that year. Especially the AFC title game when Ben was 21/29 with 275 yards, 2 TD's with no INTs, plus a rushing TD against the Broncos.

As for Ben not being a good pocket passer. He sure seemed fined in the pocket that last drive in Super Bowl XLIII against the Cards and threw the game winning TD to Holmes.

I would like to see Rivers behind the Steelers OL and with the Steelers 23rd ranked rushing offense last year. Rivers wouldn't have lasted the season.

Rivers is a talented NFL QB no doubt but I'll take the not so good pocket passer in Ben with his two rings.

If the Steelers ever provide Ben with a pass protecting OL then he would easily put up the numbers Rivers does and will continue to add to the bling he already has.

Steel Head

08-23-2009, 04:21 PM

Rivers is pretty awesome but not as good as Big Ben

I'd definitely rank Rivers as the 4th best QB in the NFL after the big 3 (Ben, Manning, and Shady Brady)

7SteelGal43

08-23-2009, 05:38 PM

I don't like arguing with stats either I only brought it up as a rebuttal to the huge article about Ben being a statistically dominant QB.

As far as Ben winning rings. Well, in the first Superbowl he played worse than Ryan Leaf and almost lost us the game and in the last season he could barely muster any offense up all season until the final drive in the Superbowl.

ALMOST lost us the game....and yet Lombardi #5 soon went in our case.

Supberbowl 43....Ben wins it for us....period.

I agree with Santo being named MVP, what with his catches on that last drive and that run after the catch that put us on what, the 5 yrd line, and a game winning grab for the ages. But Ben was the one that scrambled, broke tackles and avoided sacks and kept the drive alive. Ben was the one who made the most amazing pass in SB history, hitting an area no bigger than a dime where ONLY Santo could catch it while keeping his feet inbound. One inch shorter and the pass is deflected, one inch further and Santo can't keep both feet in bounds. Ben didn't get MVP IMO because Warner had better numbers in that game. Hmmmm, Warner had better stats, and yet, Ben came up with the game winning drive and Lombardi #6.

This article was pointing out that stats aren't truly the measure of a great QB...winning is. Champioinships are. IE: Ben is one great QB !!!! And the author is right.....Rivers shouldn't even be mentioned in the same category as Ben.

7SteelGal43

08-23-2009, 05:46 PM

Another thought . . . imagine what Peyton would have done at the helm of that team! If Rivers were on any other team, he would have subpar stats, I contend his stats are a result of his surrounding talent rather than his talent!

Exactly, which in the long run, means you CAN'T use stats as the true measure of a great QB. Show me a QB who can win the SuperBowl behind an O line like Ben had....show me a QB who can win a AFCCG behind an O line like Ben had against a Defense like the Ravens(well ok, Troy's pick six put the game away :chuckle:)........and THAT is one amazing SUPER STUD QB...period. :tt03:

HometownGal

08-23-2009, 05:53 PM

Rivers is pretty awesome but not as good as Big Ben

I'd definitely rank Rivers as the 4th best QB in the NFL after the big 3 (Ben, Manning, and Shady Brady)

I'd put Drew Brees ahead of Rivers on that list. The guy is an amazing QB considering the fact that he doesn't have the elite receivers as the others do.

wootawnee

08-23-2009, 06:12 PM

Did you all see him hanging with Shaq?.......Ben is not a freak......He is tiny next to that dude......

Texasteel

08-23-2009, 07:01 PM

I'd put Drew Brees ahead of Rivers on that list. The guy is an amazing QB considering the fact that he doesn't have the elite receivers as the others do.

I thought that the 1st couple of years Rivers was the one that looked like Ryan Leaf. I still thing he may be a little over rated.

sharkweek

08-23-2009, 11:06 PM

I'd put Drew Brees ahead of Rivers on that list. The guy is an amazing QB considering the fact that he doesn't have the elite receivers as the others do.

And to think the Chargers had both QBs at one point :flap:

Of course Brees getting injured made their choice easier at the time, but with hindsight I think they ended up missing their chance and at best set themselves back as I believe they would have seen more immediate success with Brees, and there's no guarantee they'll ever really get anything with Rivers.

Steel Head

08-23-2009, 11:17 PM

And to think the Chargers had both QBs at one point :flap:

Of course Brees getting injured made their choice easier at the time, but with hindsight I think they ended up missing their chance and at best set themselves back as I believe they would have seen more immediate success with Brees, and there's no guarantee they'll ever really get anything with Rivers.

huh? The Chargers chose Rivers over Brees for a reason

Rivers is the freakin man. He played with torn knee ligaments in the playoffs against the Patriots when that puss LT sat on the bench the whole game and nearly beat the Pats

Rivers is a darn good QB. Chargers have had a lot more success than the Saints have and LT sucks now

sharkweek

08-23-2009, 11:26 PM

huh? The Chargers chose Rivers over Brees for a reason

And that reason was Brees' shoulder injury. Brees was the starter in San Diego before they got rid of him, and they "fell back" to Rivers because of Brees' shoulder injury

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drew_Brees#Shoulder_injury

After the injury, San Diego Chargers General Manager A.J. Smith told Brees that the team wanted him back to full strength and that they wanted him to lead them to a championship. Brees, eligible for free agency, saw the request as a sign that he would be back in a Chargers uniform. He stated in a local San Diego radio interview that he was willing to take less than "franchise-type" money to be with a Super Bowl contender. However, as negotiations began between Brees' agent Tom Condon and the Chargers, it became apparent that the Chargers were more concerned about Brees' injury than they had previously let on. The team offered Brees a 5-year, $50 million contract that paid $2 million in base salary the first year and the rest heavily based on performance incentives, notably that he line up under center 75% of the season. Brees took the incentive-based offer as a sign of no confidence by the Chargers and promptly demanded the type of money a top 5 "franchise" quarterback would receive.

It was obvious they would have preferred Brees over Rivers had he not been injured, but they weren't willing to risk it with that shoulder injury.

Rivers is the freakin man. He played with torn knee ligaments in the playoffs against the Patriots when that puss LT sat on the bench the whole game and nearly beat the Pats
There's no doubt he's an excellent QB, the argument here is that he isn't necessarily as good as Brees.

Rivers is a darn good QB. Chargers have had a lot more success than the Saints have and LT sucks now
The Chargers also have more talent and MUCH better defense.

Steel Head

08-23-2009, 11:28 PM

Brees was the starter in San Diego before they got rid of him, and they "fell back" to Rivers because of Brees' shoulder injury

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drew_Brees#Shoulder_injury

It was obvious they would have preferred Brees over Rivers had he not been injured, but they weren't willing to risk it with that shoulder injury.

LOL. then why did they DRAFT Rivers in the FIRST ROUND

I like Brees too but just slightly prefer Rivers. And I'm not into bashing a good player to pump up my fav player. Big Ben is vastly underrated outside of Pittsburgh

sharkweek

08-23-2009, 11:37 PM

LOL. then why did they DRAFT Rivers in the FIRST ROUND

I like Brees too but just slightly prefer Rivers. And I'm not into bashing a good player to pump up my fav player. Big Ben is vastly underrated outside of Pittsburgh

Because they prematurely panicked with Brees. Keep in mind Brees came immediately after Ryan Leaf, so after ONE bum season (his relative "sophomore slump") the Chargers shat themselves and hit the panic button and drafted a new QB. Drew's numbers only skyrocketed from there.

Among those seven, Brady and Manning have their own pedestal, with the other five slightly below.
To me at least, stats the first 16 games of the season mean squat. It's what you do in the postseason that sets you apart and makes you elite. Of the seven you list, only five have done enough in the post season to warrant elite status. Rivers and Brees, while darn good QB's, fall a tad short in my opinion. Of the remaining five, the order would be:

1. Brady
2. Manning
3. Ben
4. Warner
5. McNabb

Rotorhead

08-24-2009, 07:13 AM

I think I would list Peyton above Brady, only because Peyton runs his offense, calling most of his plays. After seeing the Ceatriots play last season, I have questions on how good Brady really is. Given the success of his backup last season leads me to think the system pads his stats. Don't get me wrong, he is accurate and poised for sure, but I don't think better than Peyton and possibly not better than Ben and Warner . . . McNabb choked (the vomitmaster) on his chance for greatness so he is for sure #5.

Gnutella

08-24-2009, 01:53 PM

The post-season matters more than the regular season, but the regular season does hold some weight. Besides, if you don't have a good regular season, more often than not your team doesn't make it to the post-season.

With that said, Brees and McNabb are the two I had the most trouble sorting. The top four were easy, but rounding out the top five was not. I suppose I gave the nod to Brees for not only coming verrry close to breaking Dan Marino's passing yardage record (which takes A LOT), but also because he was written off as a bum five years ago, and has done quite nicely since. Brees has exceeded expectations while McNabb has simply met them.

As for McNabb, I think he gets a bit of a bum rap sometimes. Everybody talks about the vomit during the Super Bowl, but not many people realize that a) he has a winning record in the post-season, and b) the Eagles have never been one-and-done in the playoffs with him at QB. They've finally given him more weapons to work with than just Brian Westbrook. If these new weapons work out, and the Eagles run the ball a little bit more than they normally do, then it wouldn't surprise me if the Eagles win a Super Bowl within the next two to three years.

Steel Head

08-24-2009, 02:06 PM

McNabb is overrated and a choke artist

HometownGal

08-24-2009, 04:21 PM

I suppose I gave the nod to Brees for not only coming verrry close to breaking Dan Marino's passing yardage record (which takes A LOT), but also because he was written off as a bum five years ago, and has done quite nicely since. Brees has exceeded expectations while McNabb has simply met them.

:applaudit::thumbsup::applaudit:

I respect the hell out of Rivers, but Brees has most definitely played beyond expectations when he left the Bolts and went to the Saints. Dude is a smart QB, has an above-average arm, is a playmaker and a standup guy on the field.

The_WARDen

08-24-2009, 04:48 PM

To me at least, stats the first 16 games of the season mean squat. It's what you do in the postseason that sets you apart and makes you elite. Of the seven you list, only five have done enough in the post season to warrant elite status. Rivers and Brees, while darn good QB's, fall a tad short in my opinion. Of the remaining five, the order would be:

1. Brady
2. Manning
3. Ben
4. Warner
5. McNabb

by your own logic then Ben would 2nd behind Brady. I believe Manning is like 7-8 in postseason and 1 SB while Ben is like 9-2 with 2 SB.

tucker6

08-24-2009, 08:25 PM

by your own logic then Ben would 2nd behind Brady. I believe Manning is like 7-8 in postseason and 1 SB while Ben is like 9-2 with 2 SB.
Stats mean squat, but a body of work does mean something. Answer these questions, and the answer should then be clear:

A guy has a gun to your head. He asks two questions of you, and either of which will kill you if you get the wrong answer. The first question is, "list the five QB's in order that you'd want on your ultimate FF team". The second question is, "list the five QB's in order you'd want to lead you on an 80 yard drive to win the SB". REMEMBER, A GUN IS TO YOUR HEAD HERE.

Perhaps all the disrespect that Ben is subjected to is because he's not a good "fantasy" QB. I suspect that many Ben haters are unable to distinguish between reality and fantasy.

Gnutella

08-25-2009, 02:29 AM

About a week ago I was at Chick-Fil-A, and two radio personalities from the local sports talk station were doing a live broadcast from there. I struck up a conversation with one of them during one of the commercial breaks because I heard them talking about Brett Favre and other things NFL, and we started discussing QBs in the NFL. When I mentioned to him that I believe that fantasy football has distorted people's perceptions of what a "great" QB is, he said to me, "There's no doubt in my mind that it has; it's why people don't think Roethlisberger is any good." (NOTE: I had no Steelers apparel or paraphernalia on my person, nor had I even revealed my NFL allegiance to him. He brought up Roethlisberger on his own.) I told him that Roethlisberger is every NFL fan's litmus test: Those who don't like him prefer football to be played on computers and in newspapers, while those who do like him prefer football to be played on fields in stadiums.

tucker6

08-25-2009, 06:53 AM

About a week ago I was at Chick-Fil-A, and two radio personalities from the local sports talk station were doing a live broadcast from there. I struck up a conversation with one of them during one of the commercial breaks because I heard them talking about Brett Favre and other things NFL, and we started discussing QBs in the NFL. When I mentioned to him that I believe that fantasy football has distorted people's perceptions of what a "great" QB is, he said to me, "There's no doubt in my mind that it has; it's why people don't think Roethlisberger is any good." (NOTE: I had no Steelers apparel or paraphernalia on my person, nor had I even revealed my NFL allegiance to him. He brought up Roethlisberger on his own.) I told him that Roethlisberger is every NFL fan's litmus test: Those who don't like him prefer football to be played on computers and in newspapers, while those who do like him prefer football to be played on fields in stadiums.
Well stated. That's why I posed the question. Picking five FF QB's is not the same list as picking five QB's who will win you the game at crunch time. Just ask Cowboy fans. Unfortunately, 75% of "fans" can't tell the difference. 102% of ESPN people can't tell the difference. :banging:

Nice analysis, but I believe if Brees had 1 or 2 more decent receivers and the Saints revamped their D, the Saints could be a Super Bowl contender. As much as I don't like A$$ Chin Brady, I'd have to include him in the "To Win The Super Bowl" category. :horror: